Municipal Planning Tribunal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
4348 REPORT TO: MUNICIPAL PLANNING TRIBUNAL ITEM NO MPTNW 55/7/20 WARD 107: SUBDIVION AND APPROVAL IN TERMS OF THE KOEBERG RESTRICTION AREA OVERLAY ZONE IN TERMS OF THE MUNICIPAL PLANNING BY- LAW, 2015: ERF 6145, 63 TRINITY STREET PARKLANDS Case ID 70457312 Case Officer Keaton Jacobie Case Officer phone number 021 444 0568 District Blaauwberg Ward 107 Ward Councillor Nicky Rheeder Report date 13/03/2020 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Property description Erf 6145, Parklands Property address 63 Trinity Street, Parklands Application components / 1. Subdivision into two portions: description Portion 1: 331m² Portion 2: 291m² 2. City approval for development within the Koeberg Restriction Overlay Zone Site extent 629.96m2 Current zoning Single Residential Conventional Housing Zoning 1 (SR1) Current land use Dwelling house Overlay zone applicable Koeberg Overlay Zone (5-16km) PHRA or SAHRA heritage None Public participation outcome Notice to Ward Councillor, civic organization and to all summary surrounding properties. Objection from Parklands Home Owners Association Recommended decision Approval in part & Approval Refusal Refusal in part 2. BACKGROUND FACTS 2.1. The subject property falls within Parklands Phase 14C. The development parameters for single residential properties within Parklands are guided by the Parklands Design Erf 6145 Parklands, MPT Report – March 2020 Page 1 of 16 4349 Guidelines (PDG). The main factor determining the housing typology applicable to the various single residential erven within the area, is the plot size and dimensions. 2.2. It should be noted that the applicable design guidelines do not oppose the subdivision of any given erf. The guidelines were drawn up to support the Parklands Township establishment, which was approved in terms of section 42(1) of the Land Use Planning Ordinance, 15 of 1985. 2.3. The subject erf sizes and site dimensions proposed after subdivision would determine the residential style of the newly created erven. 2.4. There are no restrictive title conditions preventing the proposed application. 2.5. There is an existing approved building plan for a main and second dwelling built semi- detached (refer annexure D). 3. SUMMARY OF APPLICANT’S MOTIVATION 3.1. The applicant’s motivation of the proposed development (see Annexure D) may be summarised as follows: - The property is located within the established Parklands residential area; - The property is fully developed and accompanied by approved building plans; - No further changes to structure are proposed; - The surrounding properties are all developed with structures of a similar size; - Trinity Street easily joins other major transport routes in Parklands; - As a new developed area the existing infrastructure have adequate capacity to support the proposed development; - The subdivision of this property into two, independent, residential, free standing erven, is both realistic and recommended; - The subdivision will create a boundary through the building as a party wall servitude, as on the approved building plans; - This application fully complies with the Parklands Design Guidelines (PDG) and the Municipal Planning By-Law Section 99 (1 & 2); - The proposed promotes densification and adds housing variety in the area; - The dwelling structure aesthetically comes across as one main dwelling and conforms to the “Village Style” Residential development type (average erf extent of ±325m²) in terms of PDG; - Trinity Street was designed for the current traffic volumes, which includes the improvements on this erf, therefore access onto the street poses no problematic visibility issues, as there is nothing to obscure oncoming traffic; - The densification in the areas is already ascertained and implemented according to the Zoning Regulations which together with the Parklands Home Owners Association Guidelines, allow for subdivision into this sought “Village Style” Residential Development. The road infrastructure is modern and accommodates the required evacuation, to the satisfaction of the Koeberg Nuclear Emergency Plan; Erf 6145 Parklands, MPT Report – March 2020 Page 2 of 16 4350 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Applicable Dates / Comments Notice in the media (s81) 13/08/2019 (closing date 26 Notice to a person (s82) September 2019) 13/08/2019 (closing date 26 Notice to Community organization (s83) September 2019) 13/08/2019 (closing date 26 Notice to Ward Councillor (s83) September 2019) Notice of no objection (s84) Advertising Notice to Provincial Government (s86) 13/08/2019 (closing date 14 Notice to an Organ of State (s87) October 2019) Public meeting On-site display Two (2) objections received. Objections 1. PHOA 2. Transport Department Objection petition Support / No objection Outcome Comments No comment submitted within Ward Councillor response x allotted timeframe Summary of objections / comments/ support received 4.1. Objections / comments received in respect of the application (see Annexure F) may be summarised as follows: Objection received from Parklands Home Owners Association (HOA) - Reducing this standard single residential erf into smaller erven will have a negative impact on the surrounding standard single residential properties. Comment from ward councillor - No comment received 4.2. Departmental comments received with respect to the application (see annexure F) 4.2.1 Summary of comments (of significance) from internal departments (see Annexure G) - Transport Planning Department: Objection - The CWCs do not meet the minimum spacing required in the Development Management Scheme (DMS). - The subdivision plan CWC does not coincide with the building plan. - Environmental Management: No objection - Water and Sanitation: Supported with conditions - Solid Waste Management: Supported with conditions - GIS Department: Supported with conditions - Roads Infrastructure & Management: Supported with conditions 4.2.2 External Department comments received with respect to the application: - Eskom: No objection, requirement (annexure G) Erf 6145 Parklands, MPT Report – March 2020 Page 3 of 16 4351 Summary of applicant’s response to public participation 4.3 The applicant’s response to objections received may be summarised as follows: Transport Directorate: - The proposed condition should be relaxed as it would be awkward to enter the proposed portion two through a combined driveway for two separate erven. - One entrance would also minimize off-street parking for portion two. - The kerbs in the area are all lowered. Parklands HOA: - The building plans have been approved and the units have been completed. The subdivision is only allowing individual ownership and will thus have no further impact or change issues that are raised by the Parklands HOA. 5 BACKGROUND TO PROPOSAL Background 5.1 None in addition to paragraph 2.1 of this report. Description of the area / surrounding land uses 5.2 The specific portion of Parklands surrounding the subject property is mainly residential in nature. A General Business (GB1) zoned properties is situated further North on Tryall Road and Trinity Street (erf 6075). The bulk of the properties surrounding the proposal are developed with dwelling houses being used for residential purposes. Property description 5.3 The property is currently developed with an existing main and second dwelling semi- detached units. The subject property is situated along Trinity Street. The subject property is easily accessible to the surrounding area as Trinity Street links Oakland Hills with Tryall Road. Tryall Road intersects with the R27 (West Coast Road), M14 (Otto du Plessis Drive) and M120. The subject property is located outside of the demarcated Public Transport (PT) Zones. Proposed development 5.4 The application is made for: 5.4.1 subdivision into two portions measuring 331m² (Portion 1) and 291m² (Portion 2) in extent, as per annexure C. 5.4.2 City approval to permit development in the Koeberg Density Overlay Zone (5- 16km). Erf 6145 Parklands, MPT Report – March 2020 Page 4 of 16 4352 6 PROPOSAL ASSESSMENT Criteria for deciding application 6.1 Consideration of criteria in terms of Section 99(1) 6.1.1 Compliance with the requirements of the MPBL - All the required applications have been made; - The application complies with the basic requirements of the MPBL; - All the processes and procedures have been correctly undertaken; - The public participation was correctly undertaken; - The application is referred to the Municipal Planning Tribunal (MPT)for a decision due to the objections received; - No application for an administrative penalty is triggered. 6.1.2 Compliance or consistence with the municipal spatial development framework. The application complies with the Municipal Spatial Development Framework (MSDF) as the subject property falls within an area that is identified as the incremental growth and consolidation areas. 6.1.3 Consideration in terms of Section 99(3) of the desirability of the following criteria: a. socio-economic impact - Positive socio-economic impact as the proposed will bring along additional employment opportunities during the subdivision registration process and the implementation of the service department conditions, such as the installation of separate water and electricity metres etc. b. compatibility with surrounding uses - The proposal is considered to be compatible with the surrounding land uses as discussed in 6.2.4 b of the report. c. impact on the external engineering services - There is no negative impact on external engineering services. The proposal was circulated to the various services